Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

6th main problem were solved in 8th, by adding unit size into the moral test rather than pure damage yet they added so much more to counter the counters and that it became the Hero and Monster game 5th Edition was, including the power of magic

Commissar von Toussaint wrote:
One of the flaws with WHFB was that (at least in 5th) the scale was variable but essentially one model = one actual warrior.

that was later, the 5th was the last edition were the "scale" was in the rulebook mentioning that 1 model is equal to 20 or 100 warriors

 kodos wrote:
6th main problem were solved in 8th, by adding unit size into the moral test rather than pure damage yet they added so much more to counter the counters and that it became the Hero and Monster game 5th Edition was, including the power of magic

Commissar von Toussaint wrote:
One of the flaws with WHFB was that (at least in 5th) the scale was variable but essentially one model = one actual warrior.

that was later, the 5th was the last edition were the "scale" was in the rulebook mentioning that 1 model is equal to 20 or 100 warriors

I think the way they put it was that while it didn't have a set scale and could be presumed to be 1:1, if you just increase the numbers, the result would be effectively the same.

I've got the book downstairs, but that would require me to get out of my comfy chair.

I don't know if I'd say 8th was heroes and monsters like 4th/5th edition. It was "kinda" - but different.
Infantry finally became the core of the game due to various changes - which imo was a good thing.

The problem was imitative based combat pushing the numbers of everything up.

I.E. lets say they have a unit of 30 white lions. And you have a unit of 30 greatswords.
Before any magical effects, it doesn't matter who charges, the white lions get to fight first. The elves hit on 3s and kill on 2s. So expect to kill around 16-17 guys. Lets say there's some characters in there (because there almost certainly will be) who kill a few more. So now you've got 10 Greatswords left. They hit on 4s, and kill on 2s, so kill say 4~ guys. Then your characters might contribute a bit more, but as you can see this is a one-sided massacre. Next turn its the same again but all the Greatswords will die before getting to attack.

But then say 30 Black Guard show up to fight the White Lions. They get to fight first - and so expect to kill 20~ WL before they get to swing, so its the same in reverse.

The solution? Take units of 50, 60 etc. That way even if 20 die on contact with the opponent, you still get 30 hitting back and therefore inflicting comparable damage on the other unit. But in turn this reduces the game down to magical buffs effecting that combat. And the best way of taking this unit out isn't simultaneous charges (because that may just see your smaller units get insta-deleted) - but 6 dicing spells like Dwellers, Purple Sun, that would hopefully kill a significant chunk of the unit.

It's been with the WFB system since forever but I agree that the Initiative system can mean getting slaughtered before you fight back sucks. Perhaps a hybrid system where the front ranks followed initiative (representing the initial crash of two lines of soldiers) followed by the supporting attacks being simultaneous to represent the continued fighting?

Tyel wrote:
I don't know if I'd say 8th was heroes and monsters like 4th/5th edition. It was "kinda" - but different.
Infantry finally became the core of the game due to various changes - which imo was a good thing.

You can't seriously think that, can you? If so, then you must not have played a single game of 6th or 7th.

Tyel wrote:
The problem was imitative based combat pushing the numbers of everything up.

I.E. lets say they have a unit of 30 white lions. And you have a unit of 30 greatswords.
Before any magical effects, it doesn't matter who charges, the white lions get to fight first. The elves hit on 3s and kill on 2s. So expect to kill around 16-17 guys. Lets say there's some characters in there (because there almost certainly will be) who kill a few more. So now you've got 10 Greatswords left. They hit on 4s, and kill on 2s, so kill say 4~ guys. Then your characters might contribute a bit more, but as you can see this is a one-sided massacre. Next turn its the same again but all the Greatswords will die before getting to attack.

But then say 30 Black Guard show up to fight the White Lions. They get to fight first - and so expect to kill 20~ WL before they get to swing, so its the same in reverse.

The solution? Take units of 50, 60 etc. That way even if 20 die on contact with the opponent, you still get 30 hitting back and therefore inflicting comparable damage on the other unit. But in turn this reduces the game down to magical buffs effecting that combat. And the best way of taking this unit out isn't simultaneous charges (because that may just see your smaller units get insta-deleted) - but 6 dicing spells like Dwellers, Purple Sun, that would hopefully kill a significant chunk of the unit.

OR

The problem was unit lethality was driven up past the point that the rule set could sustain it. WFB, up until 8th, was a psychological press game. It wasn't the mass casualty game that 40K has always been until 8th. Well, 4th and 5th with more of a lean on 5th, but even those were a few killy models with tamer regiments. 8th dedided that EVERYONE needed to throw an entire Chessex brick worth of dice per combat phase, and the game suffered from it. The lethality started its incline with the 7th Ed. army books but didn't reach its zenith until 8th. Now, if you prefer that sort of game? Then good on you, you have a system that caters to it. The problem was that quite a few people didn't. It's part of the multi-faceted cause of 8th's decline.

 Just Tony wrote:


The problem was unit lethality was driven up past the point that the rule set could sustain it. WFB, up until 8th, was a psychological press game. It wasn't the mass casualty game that 40K has always been until 8th. Well, 4th and 5th with more of a lean on 5th, but even those were a few killy models with tamer regiments. 8th dedided that EVERYONE needed to throw an entire Chessex brick worth of dice per combat phase, and the game suffered from it. The lethality started its incline with the 7th Ed. army books but didn't reach its zenith until 8th. Now, if you prefer that sort of game? Then good on you, you have a system that caters to it. The problem was that quite a few people didn't. It's part of the multi-faceted cause of 8th's decline.

That was partly due to army list design as well. My brother and I play with the 6th edition army books in part because the 7th edition books were much more liberal with the 'I'm just better' special rules and super-elite units. For example the aforementioned White Lions getting to always strike first with their great weapons, and also the units of blood dragons. In 6th edition it's mostly just particularly killy characters and monsters, plus strong units on the charge, that can reliably do enough damage to prevent retaliation.

I'm hard pressed to remember the last time I was swept to the point that I couldn't attack back. Excluding my spear units which ALWAYS were able to strike back. I know it's happened to me before, but it was usually an outlier from a rather specific killy unit that was usually limited to 0-1. My problem with the 7th Core rules were that only three, maybe four of these changes did I view as a net positive:



-Rolling double 1's will automatically pass any Psychology test, even Break tests. The Break test is a big change, as it means any unit now has a chance - however small - of being able to stick around.

-Units flee directly from the largest unit they are in combat with. If they flee into impassable terrain or an enemy unit of Unit Strength 5 or more, they are destroyed. If the fleeing unit is US5+ and they flee through a friendly unit, that unit has to take a Panic test. Fleeing enemy units cannot cause 'crossfire'. When pursuing, you pick a direction to chase (all units fleeing in that direction) instead of a specific unit. You catch each unit that you roll equal to or higher.

-Units in combat no longer take any Panic tests.

-The player whose turn it is chooses the order of combat. Resolve the combat entirely, including fleeing and pursuit. If a unit pursues into another combat, it fights in that combat this turn as well (the 2nd unit must have been previously engaged and hasn’t been fought yet that turn & strike in initiative). A unit can only fight in two combats in a turn.

-Units that are less than US5 don't cause Panic.

-Skirmishers can be march blocked.

-You can only use a wizard's power dice for his spells, in addition to the army's dice pool.

-The miscast chart was redesigned to be nastier.

-Independent characters on their own can be picked off no matter how close they are to a unit, unless LOS is blocked to them (remember that troops on a hill can see over units to see characters behind them).

-Characters in units can not be picked out even if on a different size based, as long as they are under US5

-A rank needs to be 5 wide to count for combat resolution.

-Standard bearers and Battle Standard Bearers stack their bonus, so a unit with both gains +2 to its combat resolution.

-All Panic ranges are now 6".

-Lapping round is now gone. Units that win combat may add models to the front rank or turn to get more models into combat.

-Charging units must bring as many models from both sides into contact as possible.

-There is no more charge redirection, you can only charge a new unit that is directly in your charge path.

-The basic Lores of magic have been reworked.

-Swarms lose wounds if they lose combat in a similar manner to Undead.

-The armor save for hand weapon and shield only applies to models fighting to the front of the unit.

-Psychology transfers to your mounts and vice versa.

-Templates which land in combat among both friendly and enemy troops no longer randomize hits. Instead, they follow the Warp-Lightning Cannon's rules and all models (friend and foe) under the template take hits.

-Only US1 skirmishers receive a -1 to hit penalty when being fired upon.

-Stupid units no longer fight with half their models. Wizards riding a Stupid mount may not cast spells. Units which move forward due to a failed Stupidity check and run into enemy units count as performing a normal charge. Stupidity does not affect units in close combat.

-Troops that are Immune to Psychology automatically pass all Panic, Fear, and Terror tests and ignore being outnumbered by Fear and Terror-causing units. They do not ignore all psychology!

-Flyers can choose to charge enemy units or fly over them during pursuit moves.

-Characters that can fly can join units. However, characters on flying mounts cannot.

-Units led by character that causes Fear or Terror grants the immunities to them to the unit he is with and vice versa.

-Units must always use the BSB's reroll ability if the first test is failed.

-Magic Resistance extends to units from characters and vice versa.

-Magic shields allow a parry bonus when combined with a normal hand weapon, NOT with a magical weapon though (also can not with a magical handweapon and a mundane shield).

-A unit can now shoot only against one enemy unit and not multiple enemy units in any case, no exceptions except when specifically noted in the army book.

-Defended obstacles have been toned down. Units attacking over an obstacle simply lose the charging bonuses.

-Great weapons confer only a +1 Strength bonus to mounted models. You can no longer use an additional hand weapon while mounted.

-Pistols simply count as hand weapons in close combat. If a model carries two+ pistols, it has the 2x Multiple shots rule.

-Regeneration is now a simple save working exactly like a ward save, except that it can be taken after ward saves (!) and is cancelled by flaming attacks.

-Buildings. Complete new rules for moving and fighting in buildings, including a spread on Special features

-Half VPs are now scored for units reduced to half strength or less, and not below half strength. The
same is true of characters and monsters (so wounded Heroes yield half their cost in VPs!).

-Units with Unit strength of less than 5 cannot capture table quarters, nor can they deny them.

-Champion banners musicians and characters all equally have to be in the first rank (players are free to decide who goes at the back if there’s no space).

-The player winning the roll-off at the beginning of the game gets to choose the table side but also has to start deploying, balancing out the importance of the initial roll.

 Just Tony wrote:
I'm hard pressed to remember the last time I was swept to the point that I couldn't attack back.

It was common in 5th, especially if you played Empire against Chaos. Remember Empire greatswords in that edition always struck last, even if they charged!

I'm interesting to see that some of the changes I incorporated into Conqueror were adopted in 7th. Could be a case of "great minds think alilke," but I designed Conqueror on a pretty heavily trafficked threat on Warseer and the name "Building a Better Warhammer" kind of gave its purpose away. Thus, Conqueror has:

-Charging units must bring as many models from both sides into contact as possible.

-There is no more charge redirection, you can only charge a new unit that is directly in your charge path.

-A unit can now shoot only against one enemy unit and not multiple enemy units in any case, no exceptions except when specifically noted in the army book.

-Half VPs are now scored for units reduced to half strength or less, and not below half strength. The
same is true of characters and monsters (so wounded Heroes yield half their cost in VPs!).

Some of the other concepts (great weapons being less effective while mounted) were incorporated indirectly - great weapons aren't used in Conqueror, so the most you get is having a mace or flail.

This intrigued me:

-The player winning the roll-off at the beginning of the game gets to choose the table side but also has to start deploying, balancing out the importance of the initial roll.

I used a similar mechanic. One player sets up the terrain, the other picks the side they choose. The players then divide their armies into "elements," which are basically units or independent characters. The side with the most plops down the the difference, and then they alternate placing units (basically simulating troops moving onto the field and lining up).

First turn is determined by having each side rolling a die and adding +1 to the side with less elements.

Because it uses an integrated turn order (joint shooting phase) and melee combat is resolved simultaneously, the feel is a bit different.

Interestingly, I did a lot of work with "fill-in," and documented it in playtesting on that thread. At one point there was a "priority" system based on weapon length, but it was getting to complex. I like the "everyone just crashes into each other" concept, which was also faster to resolve.

For us it was Kings of War. Suddenly we could play games from 200 - 2000 points, quickly and easily. We could use multi-basing to make modeling more fun. I went from playing 1-2 games of WHFB a month to play 4-5 games of KOW a day for months at a time.

 mattl wrote:
For us it was Kings of War. Suddenly we could play games from 200 - 2000 points, quickly and easily. We could use multi-basing to make modeling more fun. I went from playing 1-2 games of WHFB a month to play 4-5 games of KOW a day for months at a time.

certainly KoW being both relased at the right time and as games go not being a bad one didn't help

found far fewer games of KoW where I felt like a passenger, and when I lost I usually considered it to be at least in part my actual fault, not rubbish dice, not my choice of army or list but my actual fault tactically

being able to play three games on a club night in place of one helped as well

though it was wrong damn you to have my Bretonnian knights running five wide

5 wide might feel strange, but I have seen most people doing regiment/multibase in classic lance formation for the 5 wide models which looked better than the previously 3 wide block

For where I played, the encouraging larger blob units and monsters made the game unfun. A player commented to me that the fiddly bits of movement in the prior editions was actually something that was missed. The FB scene slowly bled away (where at one point in the club it was the most dominant game) before GW nuked it.

 kodos wrote:
5 wide might feel strange, but I have seen most people doing regiment/multibase in classic lance formation for the 5 wide models which looked better than the previously 3 wide block

I think there's a general agreement that units should have some minimal width of frontage to make the formation function rather than a rules lawyer's conga line.

My problem with going from 4 to 5 models was that it came across as a naked money grab. If you bought a standard 16-model box, you got the full rank bonus. Going bigger meant more models for the same effect.

Since you didn't ask, in my rules, I retained the 4 model minimum because I felt it worked but also because I thought I may as well design a game suited to the models I already owned.

However, I also thought a lot about why one would want a wider frontage, so I developed a system that made width vs depth a viable debate. Against low-skill opponents like goblins, fielding a unit of 21 elves in three ranks is a credible tactic. (My system allows attacks on the diagonal and requires units to "center up" on impact, bringing the most models possible into the engagement.)

At the same time, "horde" units wanted more ranks for the morale bonus, so they might field several units in deep columns, trying to basically bull their way through the "thin mithril line."

After 6th, it seems like WHFB took a serious step backwards, because they were very close to realizing the game's ideal of ease of play with reasonable tactics and decent balance.

I still maintain that the zenith of games development for GW was 6th Ed. combined with Ravening Hordes, and I remember people rejecting the army books for that reason.

A model count arms race.